Wednesday, August 20, 2008

New Glasgow: Leader of the Green Party Elizabeth May issued a statement today accusing Prime Minister Stephen Harper of "breathtaking hypocrisy."

"Mr. Harper has not shown himself to be overly bound to his own promises, but one might imagine he would honour a law he insisted on passing," noted Ms. May. "He broke his promises on the full range of accountability measures, leaving his ministers' doors open to lobbyists. He broke his promise to Income Trust investors to never levy a tax on their retirement savings. He broke his promise to Newfoundland and Labrador and Nova Scotia to honour contracts for off-shore revenue sharing. And he has completely ignored laws he did not like when passed by Opposition parties, such as the Kyoto Implementation Act. With yesterday's comments about ignoring his own promise enshrined in law to move to fixed election dates, Mr. Harper has taken hypocrisy to dizzying heights."

"Mr. Harper is quoted as saying (by Canadian Press) that 'They (the Opposition Parties) have no intention of respecting the fixed election date.' Let's be clear. The only party whose actions are constrained by Mr. Harper's law is his own party. The law has the effect, which Mr. Harper crowed about at the time, of denying him, as sitting Prime Minister, the option of bringing down his own government before October 2009. The law contemplated that as a Minority government, it could well fall sooner than Mr. Harper's date. There are no constraints in the law on the action of the Opposition. Thus, the charge that they have no intention of respecting his law is absurd.

"For months it has been clear that Mr. Harper was chafing at the limitations he imposed upon himself. His government has out-lasted projections for its demise. He is running on empty -- no new ideas, no vision, no plan -- or, rather, at least not one he could sell to the Canadian public from a minority perch. As a Minority claiming difficulty in pursuing an agenda, his record of devastating cuts to key sectors, from Kyoto programmes to the arts, the savaging of public institutions and assaults on the civil service, suggest a rather effective exercise of minority power.

"Hoist with his own petard, he has been acting like a bully boy, taunting the Official Opposition to bring him down. And, finally, his true colours: He is not going to be constrained by a law he passed intended to demonstrate his moral superiority over previous Prime Ministers whom he lambasted for doing exactly what he now contemplates. Bringing down his own government at a time of his choosing."

"The Green Party of Canada will welcome an election when it comes. But in Mr. Harper's posturing about a dysfunctional parliament, we will not allow voters to forget that it was his combative and belligerent approach, his dictatorial style, his 300-page instruction book to Conservative MPs for how to disrupt committee proceedings, that have led to this session of Parliament being a shameful abuse of Canadian Parliamentary tradition." said Ms. May.

Does anyone remember Stephen Harper's promise back when he was the new leader of the re-branded Reform-Alliance? He promised that if his party became the official opposition he would never live in Stornoway - the official residence for the leader of the opposition. And yet, as soon as the Cons became the official opposition, he moved right in.

Or, perhaps you remember when Peter MacKay was campaigning for the leadership of the former Progressive Conservative party. He swore up and down that he would never merge with the Reform party. Yet as soon as he was installed as leader, that's exactly what he did.

Then there's Jumbo Jim Flaherty. As Finance Minister of Ontario he took the province from a surplus to a deficit in one short year. With those credentials, and his ambulance-chasing resume, he managed to land the top financial post in the country. Little wonder that the national surplus has become a deficit in, you guessed it, one year. At least the guy works fast.

For the good of the country? What a joke. Why is raiding pensions and foreign takeovers good for the country? More like for the good of the multinational insurance/banking conglomerates who no doubt lobbied for this and benefitted financially.

Dr Miek, listen, I understand what I said isn't politically correct. With that outta the way, can you please prove what I said is rascist. I know my dentist is a very smart, educated fellow who doesn't resort to ad hominem attacks. You must be the same , seeing you're a professional.

What did I say about liberal immigration policy that isn't true?

If you can prove me worng, I'll change my opinion.

BTW DR., I would say that 99% of Conservatives are worried about what Canada is going to look like in 100 years. That's not being rascist or a bigot, but rather a genuine concern for my country's future.

This "Johnathon" has shown his true "colours", and is clearly a racist bigot, unworthy of being called a Canadian and posting on this fine blog.

Having said that, however, I realize that you operate this website under the great spirit of Canadian democracy, and allowing his postings provide yet another opportunity for Canadians to clearly see the disgusting and despicable traits exhibited by Conservatives and their supporters.

As this KKK hat-wearing "Johnathon" said himself, "I would say that 99% of Conservatives are worried about what Canada is going to look like."

So there you have it, a clear indication of the bigoted and racist "white supremacist" beliefs of knuckle-dragging Conservatives and their ilk.

Aug. 21,2008: Jonathan you can not even spell racist! You are an ignorant clod. If you ever put your foot in Quebec and spouted off as you do, they would laugh you out of the province. You represent the Conservative Party....rude, ignorant, mean, uncaring, unCanadian, unworldly and as stupid as a bag of hammers. I figure your IQ about 90. Speak up. You can't spell, you create a response like a 4th grader (probably like a 1st grader) and you expect intelligent people to take your ravings serious. LOL

EVENTS

Income Trust Halloween VigilThanks to all who participated in both the Ottawa and Calgary vigils to mark the anniversary of the announcement.

WE"D LIKE SOME ANSWERS

As you well know, the ‘income trust thing’ has grown beyond the
question of whether fair taxes are paid on income from trusts. It’s
become a giant dirty snowball, and as it rolls forward it accumulates
more and more bulk. There are so many unanswered questions. Let's list a few and invite our "Accountable" government and our free press to provide some much-needed answers.

It is said “Trusts are inefficient use of capital. Why?” Two
related questions are ‘Whose money is it, anyway?’, and ‘Do Canadian
investors have a free and efficient market?’

How can information that is already in the public domain at SEDAR
make for a state secret? How could such information be used to harm
the Canadian national interest? And who would cause the harm?

Why won’t the Canadian media investigate the falsehoods and
misrepresentations told by the Minister of Finance to a committee of
Parliament? Was the Minister in contempt of Parliament?

Why won’t the Canadian media report (a) government tax revenues
gained from BCE in 2006 when BCE was a corporation to (b) government
tax revenues that would be gained in 2007 from BCE, if BCE had been
allowed to proceed to a trust, and (c) government tax revenues that
will be gained in 2007 from BCE, when BCE ownership has been carved
up as 45% foreign ownership and 55% large Canadian pension fund
ownership?